--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24138
--
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO||20407
nThis||
Summary|[4.1 regression] ICE with |[4.1 re
The following code now ICEs on the mainline:
typedef struct {
unsigned char dir;
int data[];
} AiDefaultRailBlock;
static const AiDefaultRailBlock _raildata_ai_0 = { 1, { 0, 4 } };
--
Summary: [4.1 regression] ICE with the code in 20407
Product: gcc
Version:
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30
06:02 ---
Add a counter and there it works.
--
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2005-05-27 00:02
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30
05:30 ---
Subject: Bug 24059
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-30 05:30:18
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog
Added files:
gcc/t
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30
05:28 ---
I see this a lot when I accidently write java code after having writting C and
C++ code.
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30
05:18 ---
*** Bug 21731 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30
05:17 ---
Fixed in 4.1.0:
t.cc:9: error: use of a is ambiguous
t.cc:2: error: first declared as A* a here
t.cc:5: error: also declared as A* ::a here
t.cc:9: error: a was not declared in this scope
Which
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30
05:16 ---
The easy fix is to check if we have INTEGER_CST and one which only spans the
postive part of the
signed char.
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30
05:12 ---
For the testcase in comment #2, on the mainline, we get a different error
message:
t.cc:2: warning: friend declaration void foo(T*) declares a non-template
function
t.cc:2: warning: (if this is not what
--- Additional Comments From BKStrelioff at Hotmail dot com 2005-09-30
02:19 ---
I still am not sure I agree, but I have read your post (
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-01/msg00514.html ) and since this appears to be
an old issue I will go ahead and patch glibc for now.
Again thanks f
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30
02:16 ---
This is a bug in glibc.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From BKStrelioff at Hotmail dot com 2005-09-30
02:13 ---
Thanks for the quick response, but I think this support should be in ppc32
compilers also. The altivec memory operations deal with 128-bit, 16-byte
aligned values, and hence this support should be in ppc32
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30
02:06 ---
__uint128_t is only valid for 64bit targets. Otherwise you will get an ICE
trying to use the type.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
With following file (x.c):
main()
{
__uint128_t x;
printf("%d %p\n", sizeof(x), &x);
}
the compiler produces
Using built-in specs.
Target: powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: /root/LFS/source/gcc/gcc-4.0.2/configure --prefix=/tools --
disable-nls --with-local-prefix=/t
--- Additional Comments From kev dot gilbert at cdu dot edu dot au
2005-09-30 01:59 ---
A discussion on another mailing list revealed the page
http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-devel&m=112537321024777&w=2 where it states that
the bug is in libstdc++ and can be overcome by setting the environ
Take the following fortran code:
subroutine electra(ro,t,ye,ee,pe,se
a ,eer,eet,per,pet,ser,set,keyps)
implicit real*8 (a-h,o-z)
common /nunu/ nu,dnudr,dnudb,eta,detadnu,nup
data facen,facpr,facs,rg /2.037300d+24,1.358200d+24,1.686304d-10
1,8.3
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30
00:37 ---
I checked in the fix to the 4.0 branch and the trunk.
--
What|Removed |Added
Sta
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30
00:35 ---
Subject: Bug 24120
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-30 00:33:27
Modified files:
gcc/java : ChangeLog jcf-io.c
Log message:
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30
00:33 ---
Subject: Bug 24120
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-30 00:32:45
Modified files:
gcc/java : Change
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
23:55 ---
Confirmed. We already go wrong in .nested.
--
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.0.0 4.0.1 4.0.2 4.1.0
Known to work||2.95 3.2.2 3.4.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/b
--- Additional Comments From uweigand at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
23:52 ---
I've found some time to look a bit more into this. First of all, here's
a much reduced test case:
procedure CXB4005 is
type Alphanumeric is array (Positive range <>) of Character;
TC_Alphanumeric :
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|translation |middle-end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24135
The following code compiled with just -O0 generates bad assembler with
undefined label:
int x(int a, int b)
{
__label__ xlab;
__label__ xlab2;
void y(int b)
{
switch (b)
{
case 1: goto xlab;
case 2: goto xlab;
}
}
a = a + 2;
y (b);
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
23:38 ---
Fixed since at least 4.0.2 which was released yesterday.
--
What|Removed |Added
I'm am using the gcc-4.0 gfortran binaries from http://www.swarm.org/wiki/
Swarm:_MacOS_X_binaries. From that page:
This compiler is based on Apple source code for gcc-5026 as shipped with Xcode
2.1. It includes the
new gfortran compiler and runtime libraries for Fortran 77, 90 or 95 code. The
--- Additional Comments From yuri at tsoft dot com 2005-09-29 23:16 ---
> Nope but we cannot do it without a testcase.
I will send you some fake code as testcase withing 1-2 days.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24132
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
23:06 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> > Maybe it is better to just speed up GCC instead :).
> hopefully not by reducing optimization :-)
Nope but we cannot do it without a testcase.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s
--- Additional Comments From yuri at tsoft dot com 2005-09-29 23:04 ---
> Maybe it is better to just speed up GCC instead :).
hopefully not by reducing optimization :-)
> the processor indicated is not really useful as it would jump a lot.
jumping indicator is better than no indicator be
--- Additional Comments From yuri at tsoft dot com 2005-09-29 23:00 ---
actually there are more potentially relavant options:
-funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -funswitch-loops -fno-guess-branch-probability
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24132
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
22:58 ---
Maybe it is better to just speed up GCC instead :).
the processor indicated is not really useful as it would jump a lot.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
I use gcc on large project with the optimization options below.
gcc never finishes on some larger modules.
Options are rather large compared with default values, this is because
previously while experimenting I saw performance improvements when I kept
increasing them (using gcc-3.4.3). And speed i
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
22:50 ---
log2 man page is not maintained by GCC, in fact almost none of the standard C
library is part of GCC
but part of glibc. the man pages are maintained by a different project though.
--
What
The manual page states that log2 returns the natural log, not the base two log.
Note: The documentation problem was first seen on a RH9 system, and I saw it on
my FC4 system. Both are RH distros (sort of), so it may not be a general
problem. Fairly minor, in any case.
--
Summary: Erro
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
22:14 ---
Fix installed on behalf of Richard.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
22:11 ---
Subject: Bug 24053
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-29 22:11:14
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog stor-layout.c
Log message
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29 22:10
---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Note I reduced it using delta so the all of my reduced tescase came exactly
from the file and nothing
> else.
This is not true. Even if the constants appearing in the data statemen
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
21:53 ---
Note I reduced it using delta so the all of my reduced tescase came exactly
from the file and nothing
else.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23884
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29 21:51
---
Can you try to isolate a shorter testcase? It's really difficult to see what's
happening in this large file.
--
What|Removed |Added
: ChangeLog c-decl.c
gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog
Added files:
gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute: 20050929-1.c
Log message:
PR middle-end/24109
* c-decl.c (c_write_global_declarations_1): If any
wrapup_global_declaration_2 call returned true, restart the loop
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
21:35 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
/testsuite : ChangeLog
Added files:
gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute: 20050929-1.c
Log message:
PR middle-end/24109
* c-decl.c (c_write_global_declarations_1): If any
wrapup_global_declaration_2 call returned true, restart the loop.
* gcc.c-torture
--- Additional Comments From chrisp_42 at bigpond dot com 2005-09-29 21:33
---
(In reply to comment #8)
> I'm testing Kenner's suggestion from
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-09/msg00867.html ...
Works for me on i686-linux
Bootstrap finished and no additional ACATS failures.
--
htt
--
Bug 19292 depends on bug 15326, which changed state.
Bug 15326 Summary: [4.0 only] ICE with assumed length character strings
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15326
What|Old Value |New Value
-
--
Bug 20405 depends on bug 18518, which changed state.
Bug 18518 Summary: equivalenced variables are not saved
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18518
What|Old Value |New Value
-
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
21:32 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
21:32 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
21:30 ---
Subject: Bug 18518
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-29 21:30:01
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: Change
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
21:27 ---
Subject: Bug 23677
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-29 21:27:35
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: Change
I'm trying to build gcc-3.4.3 on AIX 5.3 and the bootstrap fails when
building, what I assume, is the 64-bit pthread libraries.
> ../gcc-3.4.3/config.guess
powerpc-ibm-aix5.3.0.0
../gcc-3.4.3/configure --srcdir=../gcc-3.4.3 --enable-languages=c,c++ --enable-
threads=aix --disable-nls
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||christian dot joensson at
||gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bu
--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-09-29 21:08
---
A priori no exception is ever raised in this test. Who could help on this one?
Is reverting this patch an option?
Laurent
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24003
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
20:44 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> The line number points to the inlined function, not to
> 'PyMarshal_ReadShortFromFile'. Is this intended?
In a way yes but that would be PR 17506 which I have not submitted the pat
--- Additional Comments From doko at debian dot org 2005-09-29 20:40
---
The line number points to the inlined function, not to
'PyMarshal_ReadShortFromFile'. Is this intended?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24129
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
20:35 ---
Lets look at the two functions:
static int
r_short(RFILE *p)
{
register short x;
x = ((p)->fp ? _IO_getc ((p)->fp) : (((p)->ptr != (p)->end) ? (unsigned
char)*(p)->ptr++ : (-1)));
x |= ((p)->fp ? _IO_g
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
20:26 ---
I really doubt this is bogus but I have not looked into the source yet.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24129
--- Additional Comments From doko at debian dot org 2005-09-29 20:24
---
Created an attachment (id=9841)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9841&action=view)
preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24129
$ gcc -O3 -c -Wall -fno-strict-aliasing marshal.i
../Python/marshal.c: In function 'PyMarshal_ReadShortFromFile':
../Python/marshal.c:342: warning: 'rf.end' is used uninitialized in this
function
../Python/marshal.c:342: warning: 'rf.ptr' is used uninitialized in this
function
The warning is not
--- Additional Comments From dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
2005-09-29 20:10 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Subject: Re: Unconditional warning when using -combine
>
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 08:46:20PM -, dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot
edu wrote:
> > > So this about
--- Additional Comments From heas at shrubbery dot net 2005-09-29 20:07
---
Subject: Re: cpp segfaults when a non-existent include is encountered
dgettext.c thinks that libintl_dcgettext returns an int. Which I do not
understand, since it includes libintl.h which has:
# 163 "./libint
--- Additional Comments From erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-09-29
19:48 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Working on a patch.
Turned out to be much more work than I first thought. I'll leave it for now.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20541
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From heas at shrubbery dot net 2005-09-29 19:43
---
Subject: Re: cpp segfaults when a non-existent include is encountered
Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 10:18:27PM -, heas at shrubbery dot net:
>
> --- Additional Comments From heas at shrubbery dot net 2005-09-2
libjava.compile/PR6865.xfail says that the test 'shouldfail'. However in
addition to reporting an error, the compiler ICEs.
I am not sure what the right answer is, but reporting PASS for an ICE probably
is not what we want.
--
Summary: ICE in libjava.compile/PR6865.java reported as "
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
19:39 ---
Fixed
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
19:38 ---
Subject: Bug 24117
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-29 19:38:01
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog tree-ssa-structalias.c
Add
Make -k check in libjava shows an ICE on this test case, However this is
reported as a PASS.
To reproduce: Run make -k check in libjava.
--
Summary: ICE in libjava.compile/PR6865.java reported as "PASS" in
testsuite.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.
--- Additional Comments From steinmtz at us dot ibm dot com 2005-09-29
19:26 ---
Here's the backtrace:
#0 make_edges (min=0x402ebe70, max=0x4070edd0, update_p=1)
at /home/steinmtz/work/src/mainline/gcc/gcc/cfgbuild.c:350
#1 0x1048d144 in find_many_sub_basic_blocks (blocks=0x0)
at /h
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |3.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6865
--- Additional Comments From jblomqvi at cc dot hut dot fi 2005-09-29
18:59 ---
Patch here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-09/msg01841.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24112
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2005-09-29 18:58 ---
Subject: Re: Unconditional warning when using -combine
On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 08:46:20PM -, dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot
edu wrote:
> > So this about the following:
> > int f(a)
> > int a;
> > {
> >
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
Take the following code:
#include
int
foo (int a, ...)
{
va_list ap;
va_list ap1;
va_list ap2;
va_list ap3;
va_list ap4;
va_start (ap, a);
int b;
ap1 = ap;
ap2 = ap1;
do {
ap1 = ap2;
b = va_arg (ap1, int);
ap2 = ap1;
} while (b > 10);
return a + b;
}
int
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-09-29 18:34
---
Looking into it...
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |pcarlini
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-09-29 18:32
---
Fixed for 4.0.3.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
18:31 ---
Subject: Bug 23978
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-29 18:30:51
Modified files:
libstdc++-v3 : Change
--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29 18:23
---
Backport from 4.1.0 to 4.0.3.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
18:22 ---
Subject: Bug 24005
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-29 18:22:21
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : Change
--- Additional Comments From mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-09-29 18:20
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] push_fields_onto_fieldstack
calculates offset incorrectly
jason at redhat dot com wrote:
>>I agree that using COMPONENT_REFs is good, but I think that the
>>FIELD_DECL for B s
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
18:10 ---
Subject: Bug 24005
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-29 18:10:33
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: Change
--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29 17:54
---
INTERVAL is not part of the Fortran 95 and a text search of the
final committee draft of the Fortran 2003 shows that INTERVAL is
not included in Fortran 2003. A module that implements interval
arithmetic can
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
17:42 ---
Subject: Bug 23978
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-29 17:42:42
Modified files:
libstdc++-v3 : ChangeLog
libstdc++-v3/inclu
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
17:29 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
E
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
17:24 ---
> The problem here is that we have to create some types before setting
> size_type, and in creating those types we need to set their size to some
> integral constant, and that integral constant has to have
--- Additional Comments From jason at redhat dot com 2005-09-29 17:19
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] push_fields_onto_fieldstack
calculates offset incorrectly
mark at codesourcery dot com wrote:
>
> What I meant by "lying" (an admittedly overly contentious choice of
> word) was th
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
17:18 ---
I'm testing a patch.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |
Currently, SharedLibHelper will make a copy of a .so in some situations.
Specifically, this happens if the .so has already been opened by a
different class loader.
On systems that support it, we could (perhaps) use the dlmopen() call to avoid
this copy. This would be more efficient. Note that th
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23978
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29 16:31
---
Subject: Re: too liberal operator lookup
On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 02:28:03PM -, mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> Also, please code this using a loop:
>
> for (i = 0; i < 2; ++i) {
> if (i ==
--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-09-29 16:29
---
Confirmed. Seems as if this never worked.
W.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFI
--- Additional Comments From uttamp at us dot ibm dot com 2005-09-29 16:24
---
My apologies if INTERVAL is not a reserved keyword as part of fortran 95
standard? I thought it is part of the standard, or is it an extension to it?
Please close it appropriately if this is invalid. Sorry fo
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
16:21 ---
We do have a patch adding that enhancement.
--
What|Removed |Added
URL|
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
16:20 ---
Fixed at least on the mainline.
--
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|4.0.0 4.1.0
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
16:18 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.0 |4.0.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23663
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jblomqvi at cc dot hut dot
|dot org |fi
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
16:14 ---
We now have a proposed patch for that. It should be commited as soon as
paperwork issues are resolved.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
16:10 ---
Subject: Bug 21983
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-29 16:09:43
Modified files:
gcc/cp : Change
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29
16:03 ---
Subject: Bug 23663
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-29 16:02:25
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: Change
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo
